--- Comment #5 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-22 05:19 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> How come this is still sitting unconfirmed? This is something that involves
> Linux et. al. Using --without-cloog, ppl, or mpc doesn't work right as per
> previous post, so it is more than jus
--- Comment #4 from xenofears at gmail dot com 2009-07-22 04:57 ---
How come this is still sitting unconfirmed? This is something that involves
Linux et. al. Using --without-cloog, ppl, or mpc doesn't work right as per
previous post, so it is more than just cosmetic.
I don't really car
the following:
make[3]: Entering directory
`/home/peter/mount/GCC/gcc-trunk/build-win-149872-20090721/x86_64-w64-mingw32/libstdc++-v3'
Making all in include
make[4]: Entering directory
`/home/peter/mount/GCC/gcc-trunk/build-win-149872-20090721/x86_64-w64-mingw32/libstdc++-v3/include'
Hi,
I use h8300-gcc.
Only when optional optimization was applied, compile error occurred in this
attached program.
If optional optimization is not used, it is possible to execute the program.
--
This is a command and a compile err
--- Comment #2 from bje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-22 00:09 ---
Confirmed. ICE does not occur without -flto.
--
bje at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #1 from bje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-22 00:02 ---
Confirmed.
--
bje at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-22 00:02
---
Is there a particular reason why we can not change this to off_t with 4.5.?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39654
--- Comment #5 from kkojima at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-21 22:47 ---
Binary search on 4.4 branch shows the failure was gone
after revision 145118:
2009-03-27 Xinliang David Li
PR tree-optimization/39548
* tree-ssa-copy.c (copy_prop_visit_phi_node): Add copy
The declaration of S2 below is accepted by the C++ compiler, but not the C
compiler.
struct __attribute__((aligned(8))) S1 { int i; };
struct __attribute__( aligned(8) S2 { int i; };
Tentative parsing causes the paren checks to have no effect.
--
Summary: C++ compiler accepts __at
--- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-21 19:49 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> Just to clarify: you might misunderstand this. In Fortran, -Wunused-parameters
> is used to issue a warning whenever a constant (which in Fortran called
> "PARAMETER") is declared but not use
--- Comment #2 from wirawan0 at gmail dot com 2009-07-21 19:34 ---
Just to clarify: you might misunderstand this. In Fortran, -Wunused-parameters
is used to issue a warning whenever a constant (which in Fortran called
"PARAMETER") is declared but not used. It has nothing to do with funct
--- Comment #1 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-21 19:25 ---
gcc.info gives
`-Wunused-parameter'
Warn whenever a function parameter is unused aside from its
declaration.
To suppress this warning use the `unused' attribute (*note
Variable Attributes::).
gfo
According to GCC manual, the -Wno-blah option should be there to negate the
-Wblah option. I notice that gcc 4.3.2 and gcc 4.4.0 does not support
-Wno-unused-parameters option. Please add this to the command-line option of
f951.
Thanks,
Wirawan
--
Summary: gfortran does not recognize
Hi,
There is an asm code for 32x32->64 function in the "longlong.h" file which can
be used for 68060 CPU:
#define umul_ppmm(xh, xl, a, b) \
__asm__ ("| Inlined umul_ppmm\n" \
"move%.l %2,%/d0\n" \
--- Comment #3 from jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com 2009-07-21 17:45
---
It tells you the location of the call. If you've specified the template
arguments at that location then you can see what they are, I don't see how
putting them in the diagnostic will save hours if you could find o
--- Comment #9 from jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com 2009-07-21 17:36
---
(In reply to comment #0)
>
> This is also not conforming to the "specification" in
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/1999-08n/msg01069.html
>
> Warn when a derived class function declaration may be an error in
--- Comment #1 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-21 17:20 ---
Joseph - I'm working on this one, but I'd appreciate it if you could help
compile a list of good test inputs beyond the one in the first comment. I.e.
especially for the annex G stuff. That way I can be more confiden
--- Comment #5 from spop at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-21 16:50 ---
Fixed.
--
spop at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #1 from estrizhov at topcon dot com 2009-07-21 16:45 ---
Created an attachment (id=18237)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18237&action=view)
testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40818
I've tried to compile source where `enum' in constructor is presense and used
inside. This combination issues internal error. Sample source file is attached,
command line is:
g++ -flto -c err-lto-lso-l821.c
g++ -v:
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=/home/estrizhov/tools/arm-elf-eabi-lto/bin/ar
--- Comment #1 from spop at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-21 16:31 ---
Hi,
Cases 1 and 2 are transformed as asked by -fgraphite-identity.
Case 3 is not recognized by graphite because there is a condition
that depends on a data reference. This will be fixed in a future
version of Graphit
--- Comment #9 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-07-21 15:36 ---
Fixed.
BTW: The patch to vectorize unsigned int -> double is at [1].
[1] http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-07/msg01170.html
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |
--- Comment #4 from dh458 at oakapple dot net 2009-07-21 15:19 ---
(In reply to comment #0)
In the original SPECmpi source code,
I was able to make the compile-time bug go away with this source workaround:
change e.g.
Ro => Hydro_vars( first_cell:last_cell, j, k)%cell_var(
--- Comment #8 from uros at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-21 15:17 ---
Subject: Bug 40811
Author: uros
Date: Tue Jul 21 15:17:23 2009
New Revision: 149861
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=149861
Log:
PR target/40811
* config/i386/sse.md (sse2_cvtudq2p
--- Comment #8 from uros at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-21 15:17 ---
Subject: Bug 40809
Author: uros
Date: Tue Jul 21 15:17:23 2009
New Revision: 149861
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=149861
Log:
PR target/40811
* config/i386/sse.md (sse2_cvtudq2p
--- Comment #6 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-21 15:01 ---
Fixed.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #5 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-21 14:59 ---
Subject: Bug 40813
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Jul 21 14:59:43 2009
New Revision: 149858
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=149858
Log:
PR tree-optimization/40813
* tree-inline.c (copy_
--- Comment #4 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-21 14:51 ---
Subject: Bug 40813
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Jul 21 14:51:13 2009
New Revision: 149857
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=149857
Log:
PR tree-optimization/40813
* tree-inline.c (copy_
TARGET_OPTION_VALID_ATTRIBUTE_P is implemented.
TARGET_VALID_OPTION_ATTRIBUTE_P is documented & mentioned in ChangeLog-2008
--
Summary: TARGET_VALID_OPTION_ATTRIBUTE_P vs.
TARGET_OPTION_VALID_ATTRIBUTE_P
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.0
--- Comment #7 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-07-21 11:32 ---
Created an attachment (id=18236)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18236&action=view)
implement vectorization of unsigned int -> float
This patch vectorizes unsigned int -> float conversion.
--
http
--- Comment #11 from jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com 2009-07-21 10:51
---
There is a lot of overlap between this warning and the functionality described
by http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2852.html (which
will be updated by N2928 in a couple of weeks.)
It migh
--- Comment #6 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-07-21 10:04 ---
Taking a bug.
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at
--- Comment #5 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-07-21 10:04 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Subject: Bug 40811
>
> Author: uros
> Date: Tue Jul 21 07:22:51 2009
> New Revision: 149847
Sorry, wrong PR number.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40811
--- Comment #14 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-07-21 10:02 ---
Fixed also on branches.
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REO
--- Comment #7 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-07-21 10:00 ---
Subject: Bug 40811
Author: uros
Date: Tue Jul 21 07:22:51 2009
New Revision: 149847
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=149847
Log:
Backport from mainline:
2009-04-29 Richard Guenther
--- Comment #13 from uros at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-21 09:57 ---
Subject: Bug 39943
Author: uros
Date: Tue Jul 21 09:57:46 2009
New Revision: 149851
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=149851
Log:
Backport from mainline:
2009-04-29 Richard Guenth
--- Comment #6 from uros at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-21 09:57 ---
Subject: Bug 40809
Author: uros
Date: Tue Jul 21 09:57:46 2009
New Revision: 149851
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=149851
Log:
Backport from mainline:
2009-04-29 Richard Guenthe
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-21 09:34 ---
Hmm, looks like a no-op patch to me ;)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40813
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-21 09:31 ---
This was fixed in GCC 4.1.2.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-21 09:30 ---
rite = rite + D.2003;
is a POINTER_PLUS_EXPR, there is no POINTER_MINUS_EXPR so the separate negation
is expected at the tree level. We can fix this as early as during expansion
(D.2003 should be marked as elig
> I didn't see the original message to which this is replying.
It's about C++ code which contains a function overloaded on jbyte and
jboolean. This fails with GCJ because they are typedef'ed to the same
type.
> If you can make a test case I'll see if the bug can be fixed.
Compare the table I re
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-21 08:32 ---
Fix I'll be testing:
--- gcc/tree-inline.c.jj2009-05-28 12:50:54.0 +0200
+++ gcc/tree-inline.c 2009-07-21 10:06:28.0 +0200
@@ -1355,8 +1355,8 @@ copy_bb (copy_body_data *id, basic_block
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work|4.2.5 4.5.0 |4.2.5 4.4.1 4.5.0
Summary|[4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression]|[4.
--- Comment #4 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-21 08:06 ---
Also works with -m32 (= i386) on x86-64-linux. (For completeness: There is a
2GB problem for FTELL, cf. PR 39654, due to the ABI.)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40812
--- Comment #19 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2009-07-21 07:54 ---
still fails with gcc version 4.5.0 20090721 (experimental) [trunk revision
149846] (GCC)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40005
--- Comment #5 from drangon dot mail at gmail dot com 2009-07-21 07:47
---
and newest code in gcc svn trunk and gcc svn branch-4.4 both has this problem.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39832
--- Comment #4 from drangon dot mail at gmail dot com 2009-07-21 07:46
---
The bug seems to occur again. It is ok in svn 2009-06-20, but today's svn code
is has problem.
C program is fine, but C++ program crashed. The error message is :
The instruction at "0x0040a7e0 referenced memory
--- Comment #3 from carrot at google dot com 2009-07-21 07:35 ---
Created an attachment (id=18235)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18235&action=view)
dump of -fdump-rtl-expand-details
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40815
--- Comment #2 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-21 07:23 ---
You mean to say that all tree optimizers, CSE, CPROP, fwprop, and combine fail
to eliminate this? Wow. What does the .expand dump look like (compile with
extra flag -fdump-rtl-expand-details, then attach the .expand
--- Comment #12 from uros at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-21 07:23 ---
Subject: Bug 39943
Author: uros
Date: Tue Jul 21 07:22:51 2009
New Revision: 149847
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=149847
Log:
Backport from mainline:
2009-04-29 Richard Guenth
--- Comment #4 from uros at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-21 07:23 ---
Subject: Bug 40811
Author: uros
Date: Tue Jul 21 07:22:51 2009
New Revision: 149847
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=149847
Log:
Backport from mainline:
2009-04-29 Richard Guenthe
--- Comment #1 from carrot at google dot com 2009-07-21 07:15 ---
Created an attachment (id=18234)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18234&action=view)
test case
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40815
Compile following function with options -Os -mthumb -march=armv5te
void bar(char*, char*, int);
void foo(char* left, char* rite, int element)
{
while (left <= rite)
{
rite -= element;
bar(left, rite, element);
left += element;
}
}
Gcc generates:
push{r3, r4, r5, r6,
53 matches
Mail list logo
